September 19, 2013

As I may have mentioned before, once or even twice, it's amusing that the national media routinely informs us that IQ is "discredited," all the while everybody who is anybody in Manhattan makes their four-year-olds take a Wechsler IQ test to claw their way into a $40,220 per year kindergarten.

For generations, families have dreaded and despised the exam used to determine the fate of 4- and 5-year-olds seeking entry into the elite world of New York City private schools.

But next year, the test, commonly known as the E.R.B., is likely to be dropped as an entry requirement by most of the schools. A group representing the schools announced this week that, because of concerns that the popularity of test-preparation programs and coaching had rendered its results meaningless, it would no longer recommend that its members use the test.

It's time for an independent commission to examine other high stakes tests, like the SAT and ACT, to understand the impact of test-prepping. My suggestion a few years ago was that colleges should start giving major weight in the admissions process to Advanced Placement tests, because if you spend hundreds of hours of test prepping American History or Physics, you'll probably at least learn something, just by accident.

“It creates a lot of anxiety in families and kids that is unnecessary,” said Patricia Hayot, the head of Chapin School, who leads the group, the Independent School Admissions Association of Greater New York. “We’re being brave. We’re trying to explore a new way.”

The decision quickly upended the frenzied arena of private school admissions.

The association represents 130 private and independent schools, including some of the city’s most respected institutions: The Dalton School, Riverdale Country School and Packer Collegiate Institute, among others.

While the schools are free to continue using the exam, Dr. Hayot said she expected the vast majority to scrap it after the association’s contract with the exam’s administrator ends next spring. (At least one school, Horace Mann, said on Thursday that it would stick with the test.)

For years, public and private schools across the country have grappled with questions about the value of standardized admissions exams. The city’s Education Department, responding to concerns that too many children were being coached for the test to enter gifted and talented programs, modified its own exam this year, which backfired when even more students qualified for the programs.

You almost might get the impression that not very many people actually understand testing and can make reasonable forecasts about what changes in testing portend. And most of the ones who do are in the test creation business, so they like it when an old test gets dumped and then they get paid a lot of money to whip up a new one pronto that probably will get dumped down the road, too. Ignorance and hysteria regarding testing means jobs for the boys.

The rise of the test-preparation industry, with guidebooks, tutoring sessions and sample questions aplenty, has raised questions about whether standardized tests accurately measure a child’s abilities. But a viable alternative has proved to be elusive, given the desire for a way to measure students against a single yardstick. ...

But Dr. Hayot said that a task force assembled by the schools association had found the results to be “tainted” by test preparation and recommended that the exam no longer be used in admissions for kindergarten and first grade, the common entry points for private elementary school. Last year, 3,173 students took the test for those grades, according to the bureau.

You know, 3,173 tots isn't a big number, considering how many articles I've read on the ERB/Wechsler over the years. But, they are 3,173 important four-year-olds.

The E.R.B. test is derived from an exam known as the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence, which measures, among things, vocabulary and the ability to identify geometric shapes. At many admissions offices, test scores are considered alongside interviews with prospective families and students, recommendations from preschools and observations of students in group settings.

The association is working with experts to develop a new assessment by February. Dr. Hayot said it was too early to say what the assessments would look like, but she said the group was considering ways of measuring noncognitive skills, like resilience and attention span. She also said the group might consider providing written evaluations of students, rather than a score.

They've been working on their new test for three or four years, right? And have done lots of field testing already to make sure they know what they're doing, right? This isn't going to be a fiasco like how the L.A. public schools were told to do throw out their old end of year tests for new Common Core tests and do them next spring on iPads that haven't yet arrived. And then somebody noticed that the Common Core tests wanted typed answers and they hadn't budgeted for keyboards for the iPads. Or for typing lessons for the students.

The Wechsler brand IQ tests go back to the 1930s, but evidently it can't take more than a few months to come up with something totally different and better

Probably what the schools would most like to do is just Google the parents' names to see how important they are. Probably the parents whose kids get in would prefer that. I've gotten to know quite a few people much classier than myself through our kids being in the same school or on the same sports team together. Of course, my kids wouldn't have gotten in on my merits, so forget that.

... Finding an adequate substitute could prove challenging. For all the criticism of the test, it provided a valuable tool for schools having to wade through hundreds or thousands of applicants, and having a single test used by virtually every school, SAT-style, kept young students from enduring a battery of them.

The test-preparation industry, which has blossomed in New York, greeted the decision tepidly, predicting that parents would soon be searching for ways to train their children for the new exams, however different they might be.

“Any uncertainty that you place in the process creates an absolute boom in test prep,” said Suzanne Rheault, chief executive of Aristotle Circle, one of the city’s more popular coaching programs. “People prep. They try to get information. They don’t want their kids to be guinea pigs.” ...

Perhaps no group will be more relieved than parents, who must now pay more than $500 just to take the exam, even before shelling out money for practice books and tutors.

It's extremely expensive because it's an oral exam given by a psychologists, since 4-year-olds can't be expected to read. I'm sure whatever they come up with will cost less.

Anne Yoakam Ellsworth, 43, a resident of the Upper East Side who writes a blog about parenting and politics, recalled trying to get her daughter, Rosemary, now 9, into a private school that prohibited practice courses or exams. She said the situation was frustrating. Many parents wanted to follow the rules, but they worried about leaving their children at a disadvantage.

How long have Ellsworths been in America? 380 years? 393? From a very old NYTobituary:

And how long have Yoakams been in America? 250 years? Yoakam sounds likes the name of one of the Hill People whom Kenneth on 30 Rock refers to. Kentucky-born country singer Dwight Yoakam is the most famous.

I've got to figure there are people in Fujian Province right now reading Ms. Yoakam Ellsworth saying, "Many parents wanted to follow the rules ..." and chortling, "Silly American, wanting to follow the rules so you can pay $40,000! Stuyvesant is free."

53 comments:

Anonymous
said...

Ok, Steve, when are you going to tell us some of the names of those ultra expensive, elite private LA area kindergartens that the wealthy elite top 1%ers are busting all records to get their little tykes into?

It isn't just Manhattan. How about Silicon Valley as well? Whenever the Zukerbergs start having some kids think they're not going to try any and everything to get theirs into one of these ultra elite kindergartens?

What are the names? The west coast must have a few.

After all, access begins at 4-5yrs old.

"You can't busy the quarterback passing out the Gaterade"---from Mike Nichols film Working Woman.

My suggestion a few years ago was that colleges should start giving major weight in the admissions process to Advanced Placement tests, because if you spend hundreds of hours of test prepping American History or Physics, you'll probably at least learn something, just by accident.

I used to think that. Years of working with Asian kids with 5 on AP English and APUSH tests have somewhat disillusioned me. But then, maybe they cheated.

I've always been under the impression that Manhattan is the primary place for exclusive kindergartens.

One place to check: The 'bu. Those parents are fairly well connected. They got out of having to be part of LAUSD so they must a thing or two.

On a lighter note: Congrats to Dodgers for clinching division. Ownership and gen. manager can thank their lucky sabermetric stars that they were fortunate to go to the "right" kindergartens. Look for players from the '78 and '88 teams to show up during playoffs and throw out 1st pitches. messers: Garvey and Gibson can still show the youngsters a thing or two about the ol' ball game.

Still thinking Malibu; Bel Air; Bev Hills; et al know a thing or two about where the best for the tykes are.

Wherever North West is sent in a few yrs time for kindergarten could be a clue to the whole entire puzzle re: West Coasters well connected kiddies.

Though you'd think that, with five-figure tuition rates, there'd be more emphasis on getting through as opposed to getting in (and yes, I'm aware such tuitions already place these schools out of many's reach, regardless of ability)...

Test prep for the SAT and the ACT used to be a lot more effective, but probably contrary to the wishes of the anti-standardized testing folks, they just resulted in successful efforts to make the tests more fair and less game-able. Now the only real advantage as far as I can tell is, they give you tips on how to mess up the least, and some very basic tips to reduce options on multiple-choice that I was taught in elementary school in the 80's.

Arnold Gesell (see wikipedia) is a name to be invoked within this topic. His work has been largely sidestepped because of his respect for the biological bases of individual and group differences. His work serves to emphasize the usefulness of assessment (observation and structured ratings, e.g. ) as a foundation from which the precison and predictive potential of testing can be more solidly extended. Gesell definitively demonstrated among white children of the 1940's that females had a much more rapid biological maturation in the kindergarten age range relevant to reading readiness. It was an inconvenient truth that helped usher his work into undue neglect.

Arnold Gesell (see wikipedia) deserves regard within this topic.His work early on established within the kindergarten range the biological bases for girls having earlier and greater reading readiness and accordingly sheds light on the far greater incidence of reading problems among boys. His work also demonstrated how structured assessment can provide a good solid foundation for the extensions and refinements of measurement (such as IQ tests ). The last several decades have been an endless and mounting war with the reality that biology and variances in human evolution ARE important. That his work was ditched is a nice precedent for now ditching tests, also. Will it ever end!!??

Yoakam (Joachim) is a German family from the Palatinate, who first immigrated to Pennsylvania, c. 1700 so they are relative latecomers compared to the Ellsworths, who were in Massachusetts prior to 1650.

"colleges should start giving major weight in the admissions process to Advanced Placement tests": yeah, but they'd need a snappier name. How about, oh I don't know, A-levels? Or they could use the IB, the International Baccalaureate?

Of course there would be a heavy price to pay if they adopted the habit of admitting on merit.17

This is probably an old rich vs new rich thing. The new rich typically have more cash than the old rich so they can pay for a tutor/nanny. The old rich are trying to change the admissions policy to something they can win at. Bidding wars is something the old rich cannot win at when bidding against the new rich, so they have these tests.

At the extreme stay at home moms can tutor their little tykes in the shapes and whatnot. I don't know if this will increase IQ, but it will identify which new rich kids can solve simple geometric problems. Once new rich mommy sees her kid can pass the test new rich mommy wants, she wants real bad, daddy fronts the money for kindergarten. (feel free to reverse the genders above or make both genders the same)

This part caught my eye: "Back in California, when I raised the issue of too much homework on that e‑mail chain, about half the parents were pleased that someone had brought this up, and many had already spoken to the math teacher about it. Others were eager to approach school officials. But at least one parent didn’t agree, and forwarded the whole exchange to the teacher in question.

As the person who instigated the conversation, I was called in to the vice principal’s office and accused of cyberbullying. I suggested that parents’ meeting to discuss their children’s education was generally a positive thing; we merely chose to have our meeting in cyberspace instead of the school cafeteria.

He disagreed, saying the teacher felt threatened. And he added that students weren’t allowed to cyberbully, so parents should be held to the same standard."

Extreme homework assignments guarantee that dumber kids will drop out. Libs are left scratching their heads -- after all, intelligence is a social construct. Or something. Meanwhile, neurotic SWPL parents are intimidated into keeping quiet about school policy. And their kids are being worn out in the goal of becoming STEM geniuses.

The SAT used to be almost a pure IQ test. Today it has some higher-level math, so one can prep for it, but in the process of prepping one is actually getting smarter, or at least more learned.

Why not just give these children achievement tests instead of iq tests? Intelligence is the handmaiden of achievement, but achievement tests also reward the willingness to work and try. Many children are starting to read a bit by their fifth birthday. They can do simple math. Why not just give parents samples of these tests and tell them that it would behoove them to teach their children these things should they wish them to attend their kindergarten.

It isn't just Manhattan. How about Silicon Valley as well? Whenever the Zukerbergs start having some kids think they're not going to try any and everything to get theirs into one of these ultra elite kindergartens?

As a refugee from Silicon Valley, the elite, "private" schools the well-connected use are basically pre-selected by where you can afford to buy a house. I.e., they are the pre-K and kindergartens in the towns like Saratoga, Palo Alto, and Los Gatos, or Cupertino (if you're Asian).

Places where a 50 year old, ugly shoe-box of a house costs 1.5 million US dollars.

"Why not just give these children achievement tests instead of iq tests?"

What they called achievement tests when I was in school sure sound like an IQ test. We got a score that told what grade level we were at. So if you were in sixth grade but tested at the eighth-grade level, that would probably correlate pretty well with a particular IQ range, as long as you hadn't been especially pushed (or held back) academically. We also got a percentile, which would be even easier to match up to IQ.

Incidentally, I don't remember those tests at all, but how does that work? How can they say that a fifth-grader is "at the 10th-grade level"? The fifth-grade test doesn't have 10th-grade-level questions on it, does it? I mean, it's one thing to be super-smart, but that doesn't mean you're going to have been exposed to all the concepts and vocabulary that a kid several years ahead of you has seen. Or are they basically working sideways through IQ: "This percentile on the fifth-grade material means you're this smart, which means you can learn about this much faster than average, which means you could handle tenth-grade work at this point if you were going at your own pace." Anyone know?

Reminds me of a story my sister-in-law told me from the days when my brother was at Columbia: Another member of the faculty and his wife were desperate to get their kid into one of the elite, pre-kindergarten prep schools. There were a whole battery of tests and interviews and at the end of the process the parents were devestated to learn that their child had not made the cut. They demanded a hearing with school's director and had enough clout to get it. They were then mortified to learn that their child would have been accepted except that his parents were deemed an unsuitable match for the school, an institution that required intense parent participation in school activities.

They were then mortified to learn that their child would have been accepted except that his parents were deemed an unsuitable match for the school, an institution that required intense parent participation in school activities.

Now see, that shows that they weren't truly one of the top echelons of the top half percentage decimals within the top 1 percent.

If Donald Trump or someone of a major stature (Mike Bloomberg) were informed the same thing, he would depending on his mood:

1. With their wide and vast array of influence, make sure that the school's director was immediately terminated and never allowed to work anywhere in NYC again. They would then "re-apply" their kids to the school, this time they would gain admittance.

2. They would simply make a 7-8 figure donation to the elite prep kindergarten. (e.g. new play area; new finger painting equipment; modern, state of the art newest .... and the topper: exclusive appearances every week at the kindergarten by Sesame Street's characters (Big Bird and Grover, for instance) or Barney.

Only a fool thinks that if they want something bad enough that they won't receive it. If Bloomberg wants his grandkids into that particular kindergarten, then he will have it.

These are not true 1 percenters, they are pretenders (perhaps "only" part of the top 1.5 or 2%) otherwise they would realize that they just have to pony up more than most and in creative ways previously unthought of.

Quid pro quo. Bringing Barney AND Big Bird every wk to the kindergarten, and making it perfectly clear that they wont receive this largess unless the kid gets into the kindergarten...real world, the school gives in and lets the tyke enter.

You get what you pay for. The top 1% well understand this and they aren't told "no" or "you can't do/have this" very often for a reason.

This is akin to auctions: How much do you really want it? Then you gotta pony up, specially if its the final item.You get what you pay for.

I don't think there is a need for elite private schools in places like Palo Alto. The local schools around Stanford (e.g., Palo Alto High School) are populated by the kids of tech industry types, venture capitalists, university faculty, etc.

Likewise, the public schools in my corner of Chicagoland are de-facto private. Socialism for people who don't need socialism, as Steve put it.

The reason insanely competitive and expensive private schools are a big thing in Manhattan is because the city is too big and too diverse to enjoy the de-facto segregation of nice little suburbs.

I guess there's always tracking and magnet programs within the public school system, but that doesn't help if your SWPL kid has regressed a bit toward the mean. So maybe some test-prepping and a big wad of cash for private school can remedy the situation.

What's frustrating about it all is the utter hypocrisy, or at least the cognitive dissonance. For Pete's sake, we'd all be better off if these people just came out and said they don't want their kids going to school with D'Quaanza and Consuela.

Instead, we get a regime in which rich liberals can buy an indulgence to avoid the implications of the "Social Justice" they champion. The middle and working classes, not so much.

So as far as I'm concerned, these people deserve to be taken to the cleaners. I only with that the pricetag for Cultural Marxism were more than $40k per annum.

Cail Corishev asks exactly what it means when a fourth-grader is said to be on the "tenth-grade level" or what have you. I think I know the answer to this.

When a test is designed for say third-graders, as part of calibrating and norming the test they will give the exact same test to students in other grades. So when a child is said to be functioning at the 10th grade level, it means that he scored at or above the 50th percentile of students in that grade who took the fourth-grade test. So the information is really useful, but it doesn't really mean that the fourth-grader is equal to the average 10th grader in knowledge and ability.

There is a test, called the Measurement of Progress (MAP) test, which is taken on a computer. After the student misses a few questions they get easier. As he gets questions right they get harder. So a fourth grader who tests at the 10th grade level on the MAP test is actually functioning at the 10th grade level as determined by his ability to correctly answer questions designed for 10th graders.

Unfortunately, few schools actually use the MAP data for anything and the reports sent home to parents are not explained. They will not ability group elementary students; they don't advance the better students into more accelerated work. And the MAP test, in my opinion, is a poor tool for measuring student progress. I do believe it to be an outstanding tool for measuring teacher effectiveness, since the students take it three times in a year and you can actually see whether the teacher has taught the students anything.

Finally, Corishev says achievement tests seem just like iq tests since they are norm-referenced. This isn't correct. The SAT and ACT are norm-referenced but both now have a strong achievement test aspect. IQ will certainly drive ability test scores, and for a large sample they will track exactly. But a student who works hard will score a bit higher on an achievement test than his IQ warrants. A slacker will score a little lower.

I don't see why these elite schools don't just determine what level of academic ability is indicative of a very bright five-year-old and admit the students based on achievement. It will be a de facto IQ test, but it will also reward effort. That's a good thing.

"When a test is designed for say third-graders, as part of calibrating and norming the test they will give the exact same test to students in other grades. So when a child is said to be functioning at the 10th grade level, it means that he scored at or above the 50th percentile of students in that grade who took the fourth-grade test. So the information is really useful, but it doesn't really mean that the fourth-grader is equal to the average 10th grader in knowledge and ability."

Thank you, Col. Reb Sez, I've wondered about that for years, and that makes a lot more sense than my guesses.

The really rich people shouldn't even care what school their kid goes to because the kid will inherit a ton of many and won't have to work.

This is naive. Not how real world works. The powers that be have already decided that the influence STARTS in kindergarten. Bottom line: By age 4-5 you've got be already in the pipeline to be on your way to the elite circles. How you actually do is irrelevant the point is you've got to be in the right circles.

And they're not even thinking "he wont have to work one day" its more along lines of "can jr continue the company and make it even richer when time comes I have to turn it over to him?" Otherwise, the parent has to hope that Jr marries well

Lets deal with this myth right now: Most of the top 1%, the elite top 1% of the top 1% aren't "idle rich". They work their behinds off most of their lives. They work long and hard to keep more and more and more of what they own. Sure there's plenty of black sheep and incompetents. But that's a minority percentage within the elite not the majority.

So basically, to get a leg up or at least get the kid into the right circles its now starting as early as kindergarten. This is actually similar to elite athletes. Most of the top 1% of elite athletes that make it to the top of their sport also started as early as ages 4-5.

If someone has a 10 million dollar trust fund and lives on 4% that is 400,000 a year, which is plenty to live a comfortable life, especially if you don't have to work.

Those kinds of folks are not the ones going to elite kindergartens at 40grand per. Prep high schools probably. Kindergartens and elementary schools? No way. They actually may attend "normal" regular public schools in that case (although elite public schools in suburbia)

Many elite graduates of top schools aren't going to make that much.

This doesnt make any sense. Very few end up as janitors or blue collars so at worst they're still gonna out earn 95% of populace. "failing" for these kinds means they "drop" down to the top 3-5% of earners.

And 10 million isn't super rich.

Agreed. And those, for the most part, are not the ones attended elite exclusive private kindergartens. Those attendees are the children of parents who can leave them a much larger trust fund sum than merely 10million. Try a few more zeroes.

Changing the subject slightly, but some comments suggested that early education requires a stay-at-home mother or a tutor. This just isn't right.

What it takes is parents who want to educate their child. It only takes a few minutes a day. For a while Wal-Mart was selling these Dick and Jane compilation readers. They are great. These books were designed for Whole Language Instruction, which is terrible, but with phonics they are the best books in the world. And the Dick & Jane books tend to present life as it is for most Americans: Father wears a suit, mother wears a dress, and they visit with the merchants when they go out shopping. Their huge car looks a lot like a Chevy Suburban.

It costs nothing and takes little time to "play math" with children. It's just something to do while driving down the road. For about three years the first thing I would do when walking in the house or when my children got off the bus was to ask a math problem.

Shortly after my son started kindergarten I was riding around with a friend whose son was my son's age. They were playing some sort of stupid "ask a question" game when the friend said, "Okay, what's 50 times 100, AND NO MATH!" I think my son cheated and used math, because a second later he said five thousand. Meanwhile, I looked over at my friend and could tell he was trying to figure out whether my son had answered correctly or not.

Now not every child will be able to do this, but none will if they are not encouraged to do so.

"IQ will certainly drive ability test scores, and for a large sample they will track exactly. But a student who works hard will score a bit higher on an achievement test than his IQ warrants. A slacker will score a little lower."

A study based on a maths course in a magnet school by gender found that girls scored 0.5SD higher on grades while scoring the same on an achievement test, and surprisingly(to the study authors) 0.5SD lower on an IQ test.

My Yoakams emigrated from Amsterdam to New Amsterdam, so they've been here a long time! (There are 3 main lines by the Saint's name Joachim, I've seen many spellings - Jocem, Yoakum, one Swedish to Virginia and one German, but ours came from Holland. Because Joachim is a Saint's name you see it all over Europe. I am told by genealogical researchers we are related to Dwight (who buys real estate in every random place we live, to blend in with the not-so-famous Yoakams? I thought he was from West Virginia. My direct line were farmers who moved from New Amsterdam to Virginia to West Virginia to Ohio by the 1700s, but some antecedents I have come to know, went to Chapin in the early days!

We know plenty of Pacific Islanders happy to pay New York private school tuition. It wasn't that long ago, before World War II, that my daughter's Great Grand Uncle translated the Old Testament into Trukanese before it was a written language.

"And they're not even thinking "he wont have to work one day" its more along lines of "can jr continue the company and make it even richer when time comes I have to turn it over to him?" Otherwise, the parent has to hope that Jr marries well"

Buffet doesn't even want his children to run his company because they wouldn't know what to do he said.

Are Gate's kids going to takeover Microsoft?

Is Steve Jobs' kid going to run Apple?

Bill Gates will not give his fortune to his kids because that wouldn't be good for society he says.

And in 2010 Mr Gates said that he intends to give most of his $61billlion fortune away rather than hand it down.

My child went to a top elite private girls school in NYC on a scholarship. Only a handful of the students in each grade were from the elite class. Most of the children came from families with hard working adults with very good jobs. In fact, in my opinion, many of them spent a good part of their earnings on tuition hoping to place their child on the path to elite status. It was all a fallacy. Their children were meeting children similar to their own from other hard working families. However, college placement was excellent, but also did little to advance their elite status unless they chose a profession with good potential for advancement, like the financial industry of NYC. Many of her classmates went on to simple futures such as teachers, a chef, a farmer, writer, editor, business, even retail.. One did attend medical school and one eventually became an attorney. In many cases, I wonder if the parents looking back would have rather given their child the $500,000+ they could have saved from not paying the large amount of tuition for 12 years. But then they would have missed the excitement of hoping that their child will be the one that really makes it someday. This is all a very expensive game with few winners, in my experience.

My daughter used to teach at a private kindergarten similar to this one. I think that it is really interesting that they are doing this rather than IQ tests. I never thought that the IQ tests were a very efficient way to measure a child's ability. Everyone learns and expresses their knowledge in different ways. http://www.brantchildrenscentre.com/full_time_kindergarten.html

Here's the Google Wallet FAQ. From it: "You will need to have (or sign up for) Google Wallet to send or receive money. If you have ever purchased anything on Google Play, then you most likely already have a Google Wallet. If you do not yet have a Google Wallet, don’t worry, the process is simple: go to wallet.google.com and follow the steps." You probably already have a Google ID and password, which Google Wallet uses, so signing up Wallet is pretty painless.

You can put money into your Google Wallet Balance from your bank account and send it with no service fee.

Google Wallet works from both a website and a smartphone app (Android and iPhone -- the Google Wallet app is currently available only in the U.S., but the Google Wallet website can be used in 160 countries).

Or, once you sign up with Google Wallet, you can simply send money via credit card, bank transfer, or Wallet Balance as an attachment from Google's free Gmail email service. Here'show to do it.

(Non-tax deductible.)

Fourth: if you have a Wells Fargo bank account, you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Wells Fargo SurePay. Just tell WF SurePay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). (Non-tax deductible.)

Fifth: if you have a Chase bank account (or, theoretically,other bank accounts), you can transfer money to me (with no fees) via Chase QuickPay (FAQ). Just tell Chase QuickPay to send the money to my ancient AOL email address (steveslrATaol.com -- replace the AT with the usual @). If Chase asks for the name on my account, it's Steven Sailer with an n at the end of Steven. (Non-tax deductible.)

My Book:

"Steve Sailer gives us the real Barack Obama, who turns out to be very, very different - and much more interesting - than the bland healer/uniter image stitched together out of whole cloth this past six years by Obama's packager, David Axelrod. Making heavy use of Obama's own writings, which he admires for their literary artistry, Sailer gives the deepest insights I have yet seen into Obama's lifelong obsession with 'race and inheritance,' and rounds off his brilliant character portrait with speculations on how Obama's personality might play out in the Presidency." - John Derbyshire Author, "Prime Obsession: Bernhard Riemann and the Greatest Unsolved Problem in Mathematics" Click on the image above to buy my book, a reader's guide to the new President's autobiography.